TNAG-1101-FCO40-1351-Legislation-on-homosexuality-in-Hong-Kong-including--Report--1981 — Page 556

}

(b)

SECRET

-4-

The Working Methods of the Commission of Inquiry

Probably the root cause of the inordinate length of time this

Inquiry is taking is the combination of a non-assertive

Commissioner and an aggressive and strong-willed Counsel

to the Commission, The Commissioner was prepared to assert himself whilst Nelligan was Counsel (witness Appendix B which contains part of the transcript of those hearings). Since

Beveridge, QC took over as Counsel Yang J. has adopted a

somewhat subdued role. This has manifested itself for

example in the Commissioner's apparent unwillingness to rule

on the relevance of issues and evidence, but a more mundane

example of the extent of his condition is his refusal to rule

on the order of cross-examination of witnesses by Counsel.

A Commission of Inquiry should never be judged by the standards of the Court-room but the standards that are expected

nowadays were laid down by the Salmon Report on Tribunals of Inquiry (Cmnd. 3121). The Commissioner and his Counsel

have expressely adopted this model the latter opining in his

opening address to the Inquiry:

"Ihave quoted at length from the Salmon Report, because

since the date when it was published it has been the

accepted guide to the best way in which Commissions

of Inquiry should be conducted within the English system

of law. "

The performance of the Commission has been measured against

the Salmon Report in Appendix C wherein five cardinal

principles of that Report are summarised and the manner in

which this Commission has been conducted is contrasted with

them. To a large extent the Salmon Report procedure, which

is designed to promote efficacy and avoid injustice in the

conduct of Inquiries, appears to have been ignored by this

Inquiry.

SECRET